What are the consequences of pleading no contest to a charge of theft?

Before taking defendant's pleas, the court advised defendant of his privilege against self-incrimination, his right to confront his accusers and his right to trial by jury as required by Boykin v. Alabama (1969) 395 U.S. 238 [89 S.Ct. 1709], and In re Tahl (1969) 1 Cal.3d 122. Defendant freely and voluntarily waived those rights. Defendant was advised that the maximum potential sentence for the charges to which he would be entering pleas was five years and four months; that he would be placed on probation for five years; that if he violated his probation he could be sent to state prison and would be subject to a three-year period of parole when released. The court advised defendant of the possible immigration consequences of his pleas. In addition, the court advised defendant that because he was pleading no contest to a theft offense, if he committed any kind of theft offense in the future, even a petty theft, he could be charged with a felony; that there were other consequences of his pleas, including that he would have to pay a restitution fund fine and other fines and fees. Counsel stipulated that there was a factual basis for the pleas and that the complaint be deemed an information.